The agreement

Any good observer of the ongoing political dialogue between the main rival parties in Libya, the General National Congress (GNC) and the House of Representatives (HoR), wouldn’t be pleased with what they will find, and would observe the vast distance between the two parties and insistence on previous positions.

Anyone wouldn’t doubt that the two main parties would join the talks with reform and reaching an exit, or exits, for the ongoing conflict in mind, and to put an end to the citizens’ suffering and problems that threatens the state’s unity and its existence. That’s why, all parties and delegates were supposed to join the dialogue intended and determined to settle down those problems, be prepared to make concessions, and to spare no effort for the sake of the country, and the people who are considered to be the biggest loser for more than 50 years and who suffered a lot.

But, for parties to join the process with predetermined positions and decisions to stick to as a holy book. Such as what the spokesman of the HoR previously said ” the international community and envoys in Skhirat are now considering the unity of the HoR, as the only body that possess the right to form a government and legislature, as postulates that became behind their backs, and no one would allow these “postulates” to approach Skhirat, let alone putting them on the negotiations table.

I don’t think this statement has anything to do with politics, sanity, reason or wisdom. That kind of attitudes leads directly towards the beginning of the end that no jealous patriotic nor righteous Libyan would want.

Against the background of such statement and others, does the HoR really wants peace and stability in Libya? And if everybody acknowledged the oneness of the HoR in Tobrok, why negotiating in the first place? Are such statements used to choose HoR representatives, to be advocates for separation, not reconciliation, and war instead of peace and construction?

I say that, with no doubt, that the GNC had a weak performance because of alliances and political disputes that were behind its formation, and the pressures it faced, specially that its formation was a result of anew first experience that missed awareness, that’s why the GNC wasn’t in the desired level required for the phase the country was going through.

As for the HoR, it was determined, from the beginning, on violating the constitutional declaration in handling and receiving power from the GNC in terms of time and place, it insisted on that offence, that may look small and not important to some people, but it was important to receive his duties from the GNC without lapses, in a right, agreed upon start, supported by all Libyans.

But another thing happened, some of its members and chiefs gave statements that put parties away, some statements were mouthy and musty, that increased the gap between the two sides, then the HoR adapted immature, unwise politics, veered off its course, towards symbols of the previous regime, welcomed some inside its building, leaning towards tribalism and events that won’t build a state of equality or Justice, and supported a rogue officer with the claim of building a national army, but could a national army be built with an officer in command who repelled against the state institutions from the beginning. What is built on falsehood is false, there are so many facts and events but we won’t mention them here.

Whatever the circumstances, differences and mistakes of the negotiators, what has passed is in the past. If the goal of the dialogue is to get Libya out of its crisis and get it to safety and peace for all Libyans to live equally, then all parties should make concessions for the sake of the country and its people, because it, Libya and Libyans don’t deserve this, so for whom would negotiators make concessions, and who else deserve to be waived for? We hope that all parties would put two things in front of their eyes, the current situation of the country and the result of not reaching an agreement.

Twitter

Libya Prospect takes its readers and followers to the fields of the truth. It opens its doors for diverse and free opinions; accepting all kinds of contradiction. However, it does not give chances for discrimination, human rights abuses, insults and aversion. The main aim is to debate and dialogue on a free platform.